Party of Fear and Hatred

The Republican Party in the US has produced some of our great presidents, beginning with Abraham Lincoln and featuring Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower.  One characteristic of the three is that they were fearless and brave.  Lincoln paid for it with his life. Teddy Roosevelt was a fighter in every sense of the word. And Ike was considered one of our our best military leaders.These were men who moved forward fearlessly.

And now we have the Republican Party of today -- a group of men and some women who are falling back in retreat because they are consumed with fear. They fear science, the future, universal education, voting rights, Islam, our own government, and any form of  "otherness."

They are also afraid of people: Muslims, immigrants, gays, black, brown and Asian people, any minority, transsexuals, feminists, union members, President Obama, and Pope Francis.

The current GOP has so many phobias, it should be hospitalized.

And the thing about fearful people is that if they fear something or someone, they want to convince the rest of us to be terrorized as well. They literally preach fear. That's how we ended up invading Iraq. Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the neo-cons set up an incessant chant of fear, fear of WMDs, Saddam's secret nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and the presence of al-Qaeda  terrorists in Iraq. All fear-mongering lies.

When president Franklin Roosevelt in 1932 said,  "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,"  he was wisely warning us of the disastrous results of fear-driven policies.

The knee-jerk reaction of the Bush administration after the 9/11 attacks is typical of the mistakes made as a result of fear. Attorney General Ashcroft and the administration convinced Congress to pass the so-called "Patriot Act" which sacrificed various of our civil liberties in the name of fighting terrorists. One might conclude that Osama bin Laden won that one, he scared us into giving up some of our cherished rights. Hopefully our nation will continue to walk back some of the most egregious excesses of that ill-advised, fear-driven legislation.

In our current situation, almost every Republican politician is opposed to President Obama's Iranian Nuclear Treaty, and although our nuclear scientists and military experts support the treaty, the GOP fears Barrack Obama will receive credit for for making peace instead of war. Perhaps that kind of political fear is the most sinister; it keeps politicians from acting in the best interests of our country.

Another detrimental aspect of fear is that it generates anger and hatred. It is no coincidence that, within the last eight years, the number of hate groups in this country has reached historic highs.  If a major political party and a major television news organization continues to promote fear, those who drink the fear Kool-Aid will become angry at all those "others" who are not white and do not attend the "right' churches.

When John Kennedy was campaigning for president, Southern Baptists, among others,  claimed that a Catholic could not be president. Today presidential candidate Ben Carson and other Republicans are so fearful of Islam that they tell us a Muslim should never be elected president. Apparently these fear-mongers have not read the Constitution which rules out any such religious litmus test.  It seems that Islam-phobia is part and parcel of the current GOP, and such fear generates hated, and, in the minds of some followers, that excuses violence. Not what our country needs.

Within  the cacophonous circus that is the current Republican Party, there must be be a potential fearless leader in the mold of Lincoln, Roosevelt, or Eisenhower. Let's hope she or he steps forward soon and begins advocating for building peace rather than walls and fences..

Hilton Head's Bay Tanner Does It Again

The 13th Bay Tanner mystery by Kathryn R. Wall has all those elements her fans have come to expect and enjoy: a good mystery, an interesting main character in the person of Bay Tanner, a strong supporting cast ( Livinia, a black woman whom Bay treats as her "mother;" husband, Red; and Erik Whiteside, Bay's business partner and IT guru) and the colorful description of the Hilton Head setting.

Although Bay Tanner has always been a strong, independent woman, in this latest book she has become a little more edgy and less tolerant of people's "bull shit." And, as in the past, her relationship with her husband, Red, is loving but at times strained as they both have "a mind of their own."

In this mystery, after a period of avoiding dangerous cases, Bay meets Pudge, one of her old high school friends. She  hires Bay to investigate what she suspects to be a case of domestic abuse. In short, she thinks another of their old friends is being used as a punching bag by her arrogant husband. But, at that point, the abusive husband disappears under mysterious circumstances,  Many, including the Sheriff's department, conclude that the wife, nicknamed Scarlett, had had enough and offed the guy.

Kathryn R. Wall

If you are a fan of Kathy Wall, you know that not everything is as it seems, and from there on things become interesting.

Those readers who have followed this series will notice that Mangiamo's seems to have replaced Jump and Phil's as the restaurant of choice for Bay and Red.

One also is left with the impression that Jordan Point may be the last Bay Tanner mystery; let's hope that is not the case.

Pope Nails It

"An unfettered pursuit of money rules.

       That is the dung of the devil."

Political Campaign Paraphanalia.

I, 

The campaign of 2016 has begun. What fun. Rand Paul takes a chain saw to the Federal tax code; Lindsey Graham alternately sets his cell phone on fire and hits it with a baseball bat. Donald Trump is saying stupid things and his Republican opponents, for the most part, do not object because they don't want to offend Donald's "people." Depending on how you count, there are 16 to 20 GOP candidates and at least five Democrats competing for our attention. I'll bet the Founding Fathers had no idea what kind of circus they were creating. 

Not only is the country's TV industry salivating at all the money these people will pay to tell lies about each other, but these days each candidate has her/his own set of merchandise to sell to  loyal followers. Hillary Clinton is selling everything from t-shirts to bottle openers and  spatulas -- all emblazoned with her "H."  While Jeb Bush is selling  campaign buttons, bumper stickers, and car magnets, none of which mention the name, "Bush." An interesting omission.

Ted Cruz (R-Texas) appears to hold the lead in terms of negative slogans on T-shirts and bumper stickers. He sells the obligatory "Stop Hillary 2016" button and a T-shirt that says: "Stop the Battle Axe (photo of Hillary) with a CRUZ Missile (photo of Ted)." For his Texas wingnuts he sells a button challenging: "Come and Take It. God and Guns Since 1776." (I wonder how God feels about being used this way.) And for the Tea Party crowd,there is a car magnet featuring a coiled snake with Ted's head and the phrase: "Don't Tread on Ted." I presume the implication is that he will bite your ankle and infect you with his venom.

In contrast,  Lincoln Chaffee has just a few items (I presume they are in metric sizes), but who can resist the slogan: "Lincoln for President."

 On the other hand, I  have in mind another array of T-shirts and buttons that are not yet for sale;

"I'm Dubya's Smarter Brother"  Jeb Bush
"I Slept with Bill Clinton" Hillary
"I'm Bought and Paid For"  Scott Walker
"Christians Rule" Rick Santorum
"Indicted Today, President Tomorrow" Rick Perry

"Work Longer Hours, You Lowlifes" Jeb Bush
"We Are the Party of Stupid" Bobby Jindal
"Apostle Huck is Your Savior" Mike Huckabee
"Keep'em Out!" Donny Trump
"Get on My Bus or Be Run Over" John Kasich

"Rumpled is In" Bernie Sanders
"I Left the Party of Stupid" Lincoln Chaffee
"Please Look at Me." Donny Trump
"Irish Should Apply" Martin O'Malley
"Let's Shut Down the Govt. Again" Ted Cruz

"No Such Thing as Marital Rape" The Donald Trump
"Close That Bridge" Chris Christie
"Fired by HP" Carly Fiorina
"Me and My Dark Money" Scott Walker
"I Spread Misinformation" Rand Paul
"I Don't Have Time for Senate Roll Calls" Marco Rubio*

The quadrennial political circus is back. Get a beverage of your choice, pull up a chair, and watch adults revert to their junior high school personas. 

*Marco is against Paid Leave, but was absent for 1/3 of Senate votes. 

"I Want My Country Back" Is Back

Bumper Sticker

After the recent controversy surrounding the use of the Confederate Flag, a racist and conservative element has intensified a propaganda campaign under the banner, "I Want My Country Back," featuring bumper stickers because they are not too good at writing complete sentences.

The slogan has a patriotic and nostalgic ring to it, but it also suggests that "someone" -- a malevolent ogre, perhaps -- has stolen the country. We are apparently invited to fill in the name of the villain or villains. The promoters probably want you to fill in the blank with one of the following: President Obama, liberals, Latino immigrants, atheists, gays/lesbians, evolutionists, socialists, Muslims, environmentalists, intellectuals, or that whole unwashed conglomerate known as "non-Christian."

It is inconceivable to these people that someone would have the temerity to suggest that the country was stolen by: the NRA, the Tea Party, white supremacists, the religious bigots, the creationists, big oil, big coal, Wall Street oligarchs, or radical Christians.

Then there is the question who the "I" is in the slogan. It would have two different interpretations for a Donald Trump or a Bernie Sanders.

Ignoring the lack of clarity in such a bumper sticker, the most important question becomes: What country do they want back? a country that:

• practices slavery
• allows lynchings
• steals lands from Native Americans
• allows only white landowners to vote
• allows racial segregation
• ignores domestic violence?

If that indeed is the country they wish to take back, most Americans are thankful that "country" is a thing of the past.

Although some may wish for that kind of country; others of their ilk probably are hoping to take back a country that has no:

•  civil rights legislation
•  labor laws
•  voting rights act
•  national parks
•  Internal Revenue Service
•  Department of Energy
•  Department of Education 
•  Food and Drug Administration
•  Department of Housing and Urban Development  
•  Justice Department.

But the country they really want back is a country without:

• The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)
• Social Security
• Medicare and Medicaid

An almost hysterical fear of socialism has led these people and their politicians to spend their time and treasure trying to dismantle what so many have given their lives to build and protect. 

No matter how desperately these people would like to go backwards, the continued success of this country depends on going forward in a continuing effort to build an egalitarian, just, and compassionate society which exercises wise stewardship of our limited resources.

The Tyranny and Intolerance of Religious Fumdamentalists

Why is it that religious fundamentalists, whatever the religion, are not happy having the freedom to follow their religious dictates , but feel compelled to impose those dictates on the rest of us?

This tendency raised its ugly un-American head most recently following the Supreme Court's  decision declaring gay couples have the right to marry (Obergefell v. Hodges). Fundamentalist Christians   were outraged. Some government officials said they would refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples because it was contrary to their personal religious beliefs. Some business owners proclaimed that they would not sell flowers, cakes or whatever for gay marriage. A conservative Catholic organization (catholicvote.org) used their money to produce a hateful anti-gay marriage commercial.

Why all this furor and fear?  No one is forcing Rick Santorum to marry another man. No one is forcing a Christian to attend a lesbian wedding. No one is attacking the marriage of a good Baptist man and woman.Why do they feel threatened?

The apparent answer is that they want to impose their religious convictions on the rest of us. If they believe same-sex marriage is an abomination, they want to mount a crusade to make the rest of us conform to that belief.

 If fundamentalists believe the biblical creation account, they want our common public schools to teach their version. If some Catholic bishops believe contraception is a sin, they  want to impose that belief on employees and deny them access to medical contraceptives. If fundamentalist Muslims believe  that Sharia law is the path to everlasting glory, they want Sharia Law to replace civil law. I'm guessing here, but I suspect Jewish fundamentalists believe that all males should be circumcised. Other fundamentalist religions believe young women should be circumcised.

In addition to the attempts of fundamentalists and their GOP puppet politicians to impose their beliefs on the rest of us, they are also intolerant of the religious beliefs of others. The most arrogant example of intolerance is the claim that the United States is "a Christian Nation." Although it may be true that a majority of US citizens claim to be Christian, that fact does not make our country a "Christian Nation."  Unless our Constitution is replaced, our country will never be a Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or Mormon nation.

In case there was any doubt about that, in 1797 President John Adams submitted the Treaty of Tripoli to the US Senate which unanimously approved it.  The treaty reassured the world that "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

The beauty of the United States and its Constitution is that the government will not tell you what to believe, but by the same token you must tolerate your neighbor's beliefs.

Buck Blasts Fireworks

My friend , Buck, decided we should meet on Saturday, the 4th of July, instead of our regular Wednesday breakfast. Very patriotic, I thought. We met at Nick's Diner, and asked Sara to take us to our favorite table -- the one in the back corner, the one Nick chose for us because he didn't want his customers to be distracted by our arguments.

As we took our seats, I wished Buck a Happy Fourth. "What's so happy about it it?' he snapped. It was going to be one of those meals.

"Today, 239 years ago," (I was trying to impress him with my math) "we declared our independence and we are still free. A great day."

"You do know the Declaration of Independence wasn't signed until August 2nd, don't you?" he asked somewhat sarcastically.

"Fine," I said. "What's your problem? Did Michigan fire Jim Harbaugh?  Is Pope Francis too Christian? No wait, I got it. You're upset that the Supreme Court legalized gay/lesbian marriage. That's it, admit it. You were sure your Republicans had stacked the Court."

'Give me a break," he said. "I could care less whether men can legally marry men. Nobody is forcing me to marry a man, so why would I  care? I prefer to marry women and I will continue to do so."

At that point, Sara appeared with our coffee, and Buck said he wanted to ask her an important question. "Would you," he said in a pleading voice, "be my next wife?'

"What? Did you kill your wife?' she asked.

"Just preparing for the future. And reassuring my friend here that I'm never going to marry a man."

"Oh, okay, just fax me your financials, and I'll let you know."

As Sara left, I asked, "Okay, what is your problem?"  

"The damn Fourth of July! That's my problem."

"That's unpatriotic and sacrilegious. I will have to turn you in to Homeland Security. Maybe they can revoke your citizenship."

"I'll tell you what's sacrilegious. It's the damn fireworks and marching bands. Particularly the fireworks. John Adams had many good ideas, but telling Americans to shoot off fireworks on the 4th of July was his worst."

Bewildered, I said, "You are unbelievable. What is wrong  with fireworks? I look forward to seeing a beautiful fireworks display. It's a fine art,  albeit temporary."

"Balderdash. There's nothing fine about it. For one thing it's a big waste of money. I read Americans spent $967 million on fireworks in 2013. What a waste. Imagine how many school lunches we could buy with that money."

"Buck, my friend, it's entertainment -- pure and simple."

"Entertainment that kills and maims people, frequently kids. Also it damages and destroys property. Not to mention the damage it causes for animals and the environment. Many fireworks are manufactured in India and China by children.  The whole thing is insane."

"How altruistic of you."

"No one's ever accused me of being altruistic. It;s not altruism; it's a deep and abiding hatred of fireworks. It should be called what it is -- noise pollution.  The noise frightens children, pets, the autistic, and those suffering from battlefield stress issues. And not the least of which, fireworks deprive me of a good night's sleep because some idiots are shooting them off all night long."

When Sara brought our checks, she looked at Buck and said,  "I get such a bang out of you when you go ballistic."

Scrap the Cap on Soc

Social Security has been one of the pillars on which the US has developed a solid Middle Class; and now that the Middle Class is under attack, Social Security is also enduring an assault. Politicians and some of their media puppets (Fox News) insist on telling us Social Security will run out of money in the future.

Those who understand what has happened know that politicians like George W. Bush have raided the Social Security Trust Fund to invade Iraq and fight a war in Afghanistan. The bottom line is that The Social Security System is quite capable of supporting itself and caring for those retirees who have invested part of their wages in the system. If the system were a "locked box" as Al Gore in 2000 suggested, it would be self supporting.

The "Locked Box"
that was never locked

On the other hand, George W Bush raided the fund and now Republicans are asking workers to pay more and telling potential retirees to work longer than the promised retirement in order to make up for the money that politicians like GW Bush have removed. However, there is an opportunity to strengthen the system, but most politicians don't want to consider it -- raise the maximum  earnings level on which workers pay Social Security taxes.

At the present time the limit is $118,500. The result is that corporate executives making hundreds of million dollars a year pay Social Security taxes only on the first $118,500, There seems to be no logical reason for such a maximum. Why not tax all earnings?

Since 1983 a larger and larger share of earnings have escaped the Social Security tax. Then (1983) 90% of total earnings were taxed; today only 83% is taxed. 17% of total earnings is not being taxed. If the Social Security System needs additional revenue, eliminate the the maximum earnings limit. Tax all earnings equally.

The growing divide in wages in the US, means that since the top earners, millionaires and billionaires, contribute only on the first $118,500, many of them have already reached the max in February while the average wage earner will be paying the tax all year long. These average wage earners are also now in the unenviable position of seeing their wages decrease or stagnate while their productivity continues to increase.

Our seniors, both now and in the future, who pay into Social Security over their lifetimes should be "secure" in their retirement, and we can make that possible by having wealthy Americans pay their fair share.

A Modest Proposal: A Small Sales Tax for Wall St.

Congressman Chris Van Hollen

One of the few taxes that Republicans espouse is the sales tax. which creates a disproportionate burden on the lower middle class and the poor. GOP governors, like John Kasich in Ohio, continually try to lower the fair, graduated income tax while they raise or extend the sales tax to cover more services. That being the case,  one would logically conclude that Republicans would favor a sales tax on financial transactions. Not happening.

So surely the Democrats would be fighting tooth and nail to pass such legislation. Again, not happening.

Since a small Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) is such a simple, common sense approach to raise much-needed revenue and solve other problems, it is difficult to understand why there is not a groundswell of support. Perhaps the key is the word "financial." Few politicians, especially after Citizens United, want to incur the wrath of Wall Street and the Big Banks.

A tax on financial transactions is often referred to as a "Robin Hood Tax," in that the wealthy will be paying a larger proportion than the middle and lower classes.

Maryland congressman, Chris Van Hollen, proposed a program for a FTT similar to the one the European Union is installing next year. "It would tax stock trades at a rate of 0.1 percent (10 cents on $100) and trades of derivative at a rate of 0.01 percent (1 cent on $100). Extrapolating from a recent study of the revenue such a tax would raise in Europe, Van Hollen's tax would raise more than $130 billion a year or more than $1.5 trillion over the course of a decade."*

Vermont senator and democratic presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, introduced a bill in the Senate to offer a free public college education to all qualified Americans. As in Europe, this education plan would be paid for with a financial transaction tax.

Of course, those day-traders who make many trades a day will have an expense from which they have been exempt. But that may be a good thing. Those people may consider getting a real, constructive job. Or they will continue on as before and pay the toll.

But the bottom line is this: if a 50-week-a-year laborer has to pay sales tax when he purchases a pair of jeans for his son, why doesn't an investor have to pay a much lower tax when she or he buys a stock, not out of need, but out of greed.

And if you are going to tell me such a measure will shut down Wall Street, excuse me while I roll on the floor laughing.

*Deane Baker Nation of Change, May 11, 2015




,

USGA Plays Games with the US Open

Chambers Bay Golf Course

The United States Golf Association has an identity problem. These august ladies (I assume there are some token women involved) and gentlemen are attempting to make the US Open resemble the British Open.

Most Golfers in the United States play on courses with trees, meandering streams or lakes, and green fairways/greens; but the USGA has chosen to stage the US Open at Chambers Bay (a course built on a sand/gravel pit) with one tree, a busy railroad track, sprinkler heads in the middle of greens, the remains of old buildings, and dormant or dead grass on the undulating fairways and bumpy greens, described by one golfer as "putting on broccoli heads."

In addition the USGA has chosen  not only to make the course the longest in history, but also to change par 4s to  par 5s and vice versa from day to day  I can't imagine the United States Tennis Association changing the heights of the net from day to day in the US Open, or Major League Baseball changing the distance from the pitcher's mound to home plate in the World Series. Why does the USGA feel the need for these gimmicks?

Enough with the gimmicks, USGA. Don't game the game.

15th hole

Fox sports announcers keep referring to the course as "beautiful Chambers Bay," and I guess it is beautiful if you are into moonscapes and railroad container cars. The only hole I could possibly consider beautiful is the par 3 15th (length varies significantly from day to day) as it features the course's only tree and the viewers and golfers are looking out over Puget Sound.

This is not a course to which US golfers can relate. We all appreciate the British Open because it is played on typical British course. It's time the USGA  stops being gimmicky and plays the US Open on typical US courses.